Thought

SuhrawardI’s thought represents a profound change in Avicennan philosophy on which it is founded. The main points of departure have to do with epistemology and with the conception of the structure of reality. SuhrawardI’s writings denote a strong dissatisfaction with discursive rationality and the will to find an alternative ground on which to build a sounder system to apprehend the Universe and ourselves. This ground is found in intuitive knowledge, the kind of knowledge experienced by mystics in their visions, but also in the experience of selfknowledge. This ‘‘presential knowledge’’ or ‘‘knowledge by presence’’ {‘ilm hudurt), which is thus for SuhrawardI the only way to truly access what is, is characterized by the fact that it is not mediated through any image or representation. It allows for a direct vision, an intuition, providing the principles of a new comprehension of reality. As stated in the introduction of Hikmat al-Ishraqt, beside the sciences drawn from the observation of phenomena perceived by our senses, such as geometry, there are the sciences built on principles known from our experience of the spiritual: ‘‘Those who do not proceed according to this method have no share in wisdom; doubts will toy with them!’’ {Hikma } 6).

The integration of presential experience as a source for knowledge does not entail a complete dismissal of discursive rationality. In the recommendation made at the end of the Hikmat al-Ishraqt, it is said that this book should not be made available ‘‘except to whom has mastered the Peripatetic method,’’ which is precisely the method using discursive argumentation {Hikma } 279). However, discursive rationality alone cannot lead to true knowledge because it lacks the validity given by mystical experience. Only the speculative mystic who brings together mystical vision and excellence of reasoning can reach certainty. Hence the end of the quotation just given: ‘‘... and who is enamored of the Light of God.’’ Mystical experience is still more important than reasoning skills however: in a hierarchy of sages given in the same book, second to the speculative mystic are sages who follow the mystical path with no attempt at speculation, followed by those who are skilled in discursive rationality without mystical experience {Hikma } 5).

In metaphysics, SuhrawardI builds an elaborate system centered on Light. From the Light of lights emanates a vertical hierarchy of pure immaterial lights, paralleled by a horizontal order of lights, and from these emanations and the interactions between the different orders, further entities are produced. There is thus a gradual unfolding of Pure immaterial lights - triumphant {only concerned with themselves and the higher realms) and regent {i. e., those ruling over the bodies) - of accidental lights, and obstacles to light {barzakh), that is, the bodies.

The main characteristics of Suhrawardl’s metaphysical system are as follows. Everything is conceived of as participating in one fundamental reality, Light. Even that which is an obstacle to light is caused by light and defined by its relationship to light. Lights are primarily differentiated by their degree of intensity: the level of their share in light makes them what they are and is the very principle of individualization, even if other elements are also included the further one gets from the higher levels. Intensity is also understood in dynamic terms: a reality can be more or less what it is, says SuhrawardI, thus introducing movement in the category of substance. A corollary of this principle is the ontological weight given to the lowest degrees of light: this is a metaphysics attentive to the multiple instances of light, a metaphysics of lights rather than of Light. Finally, SuhrawardI reintroduces Platonic Ideas of some sort, the ‘‘Lords of species,’’ and maintains the reality of a separate World of images.

On human nature and destiny, SuhrawardI considers human soul as an immaterial light imprisoned in this world and using the body as a tool to perfect itself, in order to escape from its exile in the material world and reach the world of Lights. Some passages in the Hikmat al-Ishraqt showing sympathy toward the affirmation of transmigration of souls {tanasukh) have led to discussions by later IshraqIs and opponents as to how this affirmation should be understood {Hikma } 229-236). Questions of conscience of self and personal identity are also of special interest for IshraqI thought.

SuhrawardI presents his system as a break from the views of the‘‘Peripatetic’’ {mashsha’t) philosophers of Islam, and many of his theories are introduced as an alternative to their erroneous conception {e. g., on definition, syllogism, hylomorphism, metempsychosis, Platonic Ideas, and ‘‘being’’ conceived as anything beyond a mental attribute). This break is presented as a return to the doctrines of the first sages - Greeks, Persians, Indians, etc., - with tutelary figures such as Hermes, Plato, and Zoroaster.

Suhrawardl’s writings had a lasting influence in Islamic thought, not only through a line of commentators and disciples such as Ibn Kammuna {d. 683/1284), ShahrazurI {thirteenth century), and Qutb al-DIn al-ShlrazI {d. 710 or 716/1311 or 1316), but also as a method, considered as a distinct trend in contrast with the mashsha’i tradition, and as a set of questions and problems. To mention just one example, SuhrawardII’s insistence on the purely mental character of universals, especially of being, had a profound impact on later debates on the essence/existence distinction.

Modern scholarship is divided on how to interpret the different aspects of SuhrawardII’s thought. This debate, which has consequences on the classification of SuhrawardII’s writings, is doubled by an interrogation on the importance of SuhrawardI’s departure from Avicenna, itself depending greatly on the manner Avicenna’s thought is understood. Some scholars stress the mystical aspects, others the Iranian heritage, yet others, the philosophical aspects, with a will to fully acknowledge the scholastic elements in Suhrawardi’s writings. This last approach led to a better grasp of the importance of Suhrawardi’s logical theories (it is interesting to note that only the parts on metaphysics were included in Corbin’s edition of the TalwtJiat, Muqawamat, and Mashari, and that his translation of the Kitab Hikmat al-Ishraqt skips over the first part on general questions regarding logic and epistemology). A few scholars have also pointed to other intellectual traditions, which may have contributed to Suhrawardi’s system, such as Isma'ili thought, opening new perspectives still to be explored.

See also: > Ibn Slna, Abii 'All (Avicenna) > Isma'ili Philosophical Tradition > Logic in the Arabic and Islamic World > Philosophy, Arabic > al-Shahrazuri, Muirammad Ibn Malimud Shams al-Din

Secondary Sources

Amin Razavi M (1997) Suhrawardi and the school of illumination. Curzon Press, Richmond

Corbin H (1971) En Islam iranien. Aspects spirituels et philosophiques. Tome II: Sohrawardi et les Platoniciens de Perse. Gallimard, Paris

Ibrahimi Dinani Gh H (1985) Shu‘a‘-i andisha va shuhud dar falsafah-yi Suhrawardii. Hikmat Tehran

Ha’iri Yazdi M. (1992) The principles of epistemology in Islamic philosophy: knowledge by presence. State University of New York Press, Albany

Marcotte R (2001) Suhrawardi al-maqtul, the martyr of Aleppo. al-Qantara 22:395-419

Walbridge J (2000) The leaven of the ancients: Suhrawardi and the heritage of the Greeks. State University of New York Press, Albany

Walbridge J (2001) The wisdom of the mystic East: Suhrawardi and Platonic orientalism. State University of New York Press, Albany

Ziai H (1990) Knowledge and illumination: a study of Suhrawardi’s Hikmat al-Ishraq. Scholars Press, Atlanta